Friday, October 12, 2012

The Problem With Ryan's Foreign Policy Critique

The Republican Party's candidate for Vice President, Congressman Paul Ryan, was forceful and convincing in his televised debate critique of the Obama administration's foreign policy. But the candidate's criticism lacked specificity. He should have explained how the administration's needless intervention in Libya, emboldening of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, and meddling in Syria has helped to spread radical (rightwing political) Islam across the Arab world in line with a foreign policy that regards the clerical fascist creed as essentially progressive and worthy of support, and how the degrading--not decimating--of Al Qaeda and killing of its leader has been used to mask this pro-Islamist policy.

Regarding Iran, in addition to making the point that it is now closer than ever to becoming a nuclear weapons state, thanks to the administration's wishy-washy stance on sanctions, Ryan should have explained how the administration after entering office not only appeased but attempted to actually align with the monstrous mullahocracy, and how, after failing miserably in this perfidious effort, Washington then turned to Turkey's Islamist regime--which dreams of reviving the Ottoman Empire--as a counter to Tehran.

Ryan's reference to the national interest was refreshing; but he should have elaborated on it, and he should have made the point that the United States clearly has the military means to defeat--utterly destroy--the Iranian regime without getting involved in another land war.